How do we feel about tank damage right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

That said, I'm not sure why you need toggles, or even skill-swapping toggles, for either one, rather than broadening GCD choices and their diversity of output alongside other job-unique effects and interplay. I'd sooner take minute imbalances than force a one-size-fits-all solution, and yes, I honestly think that diversity --if applied well-- only truly forces minute imbalances, rather than throwing balance out the window as some here would have us believe.

---

Again - scope of the thread. But if we do expand it a bit, moving beyond just a couple simple compromises, I wouldn't have all tanks be a broad modular GCD system. In my mind, that seems most thematically appropriate to Dark Knight given the weapon of choice. A job focused around short term buff-granting GCD skills, building up momentum ("Blood") and capping off a modular combo with a Blood weaponskill.

In this scenario, the Tank role would be significantly squishier when maximizing their damage output. The Dark Knight gains their higher durability through GCD selection in modular combos, creating a natural risk/reward system. Can you afford to tax your healer more, or do you turtle? Will you have everything in place before the buster comes in, or would you blow an important cooldown? (This variant would likely only have Living Dead, Abyssal Drain, and Blackest Night on the Defensive on-demand ability side of things.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

In this scenario, the Tank role would be significantly squishier when maximizing their damage output. The Dark Knight gains their higher durability through GCD selection in modular combos, creating a natural risk/reward system. Can you afford to tax your healer more, or do you turtle? Will you have everything in place before the buster comes in, or would you blow an important cooldown? (This variant would likely only have Living Dead, Abyssal Drain, and Blackest Night on the Defensive on-demand ability side of things.)

---

Right, I'm just saying that it makes more sense to just put one and one together to get two than have double value each but have one conflict with the other. Either process gives the same result, so why not just give tanks less ridiculous eHP when they're not actually doing any tankish things instead of making them passively nigh-invincible but effectively suicidal when attacking? It's just... far more intuitive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Again - scope of the thread. But if we do expand it a bit, moving beyond just a couple simple compromises, I wouldn't have all tanks be a broad modular GCD system. In my mind, that seems most thematically appropriate to Dark Knight given the weapon of choice. A job focused around short term buff-granting GCD skills, building up momentum ("Blood") and capping off a modular combo with a Blood weaponskill.

---

Yeah, the concept seems fitting and lucrative. I'm sold. See you on a thread of sufficient scope, then.

Edit: Saw your new thread. Cool ideas so far! Will reply once I have some stuff of my own.

Indubitably, yet I must indicate that your incurable affectation to conceive all your posts under the assuaging auspices of a thesaurus has hitherto proved a most sphinxlike endeavour.

Jokes aside, I agree with the earlier point on swapping. Generally, tanking tends to be an all-or-nothing task. In most cases, fights feel like they were designed for one tank, with a second tank shoehorned in with a stack/debuff mechanic. It also doesn't help that you can bypass some of these 'forced' swaps with an invuln.

It's a shame that council fights aren't more common. I'm sure that we'll see one in the next ultimate; Brute Justice had one of the best examples of these. Omega-M/F was a good example as well. But this partially goes back to the "design fights for tanks" issue that I discussed earlier.

I also feel that the redundancy is another move to make tanking feel more "comfortable".

Another option is to place more importance on using on-demand cooldowns to mitigate damage. If you have to donate cooldowns to your co-tank when they're actively tanking, it keeps you engaged with tanking even when you're not 'actively' tanking.

It's a longstanding issue that this game's fight design has always faced, but if you make tank damage less important to the overall raid, the downtime when you're not actively tanking becomes that much more obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

It's a longstanding issue that this game's fight design has always faced, but if you make tank damage less important to the overall raid, the downtime when you're not actively tanking becomes that much more obvious.

---

See, while I can sympathize, as healers currently face a similar issue, I disagree mainly because the reasoning behind the initial request was flawed.

As disparaging as "pretty bar graph" statements have been, I didn't toss them out without care. Upon reading the topic, I went to some logs and starting doing some homework, using the best comparable ones I could (Voidwalker and Fomega, because theoretical 100% uptime) and began doing math.

Now, my math is obviously not perfect and not indisputable, but I did more, I checked it, and while I could not make exact measurements in converting PDPS logs to RDPS ones, the common thread is only the Warrior could realistically maintain its PDPS score, because slashing. Dark knight and Paladin tank heavily.

The real difference I settled on was closer to a 2% deficit. Tanks need about 100-200 DPS more to reclaim their relative standing, while ignoring their bloated passive stat increase, however, even with that in mind other factors lead to them being less TDPS to the raid. The primary reason being Healers, particularly White Mage, gained a significant amount of damage.

The above makes the following assumption. The removal of the tank stance penalty means SE likely trimmed off the top of Tanks - Whether or not the players used tank stance would not stop SE from tuning a fight with the assumption that between the two tanks, Tank Stance would have an uptime of 50%.

The above also includes the fact that tanks contribute to the party stat bonus where before they only gave vitality. That feeds back into the passive stat bloat.

If fight designers expect us to be "part-time tanks" in raid content (i.e. taking turns 'actively tanking' until one of four tankbusters per fight initiates a swap), then what are we doing the rest of the time? We're not positioning. We're probably not mitigating. I wonder what we're doing. Hmm. "I've finished my shift for the evening, going to clock out, good luck with tanking the rest of the fight!"

Healing is and always will involve a degree of shared responsibility. You can divide it up however you like. I'm not really sure if there's an equivalent for a 'provoke war' between two healers. You're never really in completion for the privilege of healing. As an aside, I'm going to be terribly amused when this new 24p instance comes out in 5.1. These have been historically terrible at designing content for multiple tanks, and with the very poorly thought out changes to provoke in 5.0 (i.e. gain aggro + gain a massive amount enmity on top, on the order of 200k), hilarity will surely ensue. I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop.

The changes to the damage penalty of tank stance isn't really a justification for the adjustments to relative damage output. If you were using tank stance in previous tiers, or if even if you were "stance dancing" (i.e. using tank stance for some of the time to compensate for a poorly thought out mitigation rotation), you were probably on the bottom half of the bell curve. By Stormblood, the vast majority of tanks were in the know that tank stance stays off in raid content if you want good performance from a damage output standpoint. No favours were done in removing it. We just unmasked the truth of the matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

To be fair, that has a whole lot more to do with tanks who don't believe they need to optimize their dps and can be carried despite that because the rDPS advantage of optimization (or disadvantage of poor play) is so small, than it has to do with tanks already being difficult.

---

I think it's a bit of a generalization considering we're already talking about the small part of the tank playerbase that 1) cleared E1S, and 2) actually get parsed during their run...which means that the skill floor for lvl80 DRK is probably lower than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

You don't need to bar all designs from ever using a single-tank setup, or else bar half of all tanks from said single-tank setups, just to make OT mechanics.

---

In my opinion, the worst thing for an MMO is to reuse the same mechanics over and over and over. So, sure, you can still have some fights that could be single tanked, or that reuse the current shallow mechanics, as long as others include interesting mechanics that doesn't make the OT feel like a lesser/backup tank. Technically, we already have DPS mechanics that are more fit for either ranged or melee, despite being manageable by any type of DPS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

If fight designers expect us to be "part-time tanks" in raid content (i.e. taking turns 'actively tanking' until one of four tankbusters per fight initiates a swap), then what are we doing the rest of the time? We're not positioning. We're probably not mitigating. I wonder what we're doing. Hmm. "I've finished my shift for the evening, going to clock out, good luck with tanking the rest of the fight!"

---

Depends on the fight. There's a couple older fights that zapped the MT and anyone who was close or required tanks to split damage with each other or party members. Personally I'd rather have more things that take into account "Hey we have 2 meaty targets" than more damage.

Because if Damage is all we really care about; ax the second tank, bring a 5th DPS, ax the double tank mechanics we currently have and give more focus on keeping the only Tank alive(Oh look maybe healers have something to do and the DPS loss can be made up by the new DPS).

Also I'll take being on the bottom of the bell curve if it meant I felt like I was doing something more than just being Blue DPS. You top raiders(riiiiiiiiight) all complained about the stance and they went "Fine, they hate it so much, removed" and we got nothing to replace it with. "Damage output standpoint" yeah as for more tanking output rather than crying about FFLogs all the time.

I don't even know what tanks want to do anymore besides out DPS MNK and BLM these days it seems. Yes, damage is the only thing that matters after a certain point so why not ask for SOMETHING ELSE? Oh wait no you'll master it and go right back to needing more damage.

So yeah, Kill off the OT position already, let those that want more damage bring the 5th DPS they always actually wanted to do since Heavensward. Besides, how many upper half of the bell curve raiders actually try to salvage it if the MT goes down? Just speeds everything up. Do it Square.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerlinCross

Because if Damage is all we really care about; ax the second tank, bring a 5th DPS, ax the double tank mechanics we currently have and give more focus on keeping the only Tank alive(Oh look maybe healers have something to do and the DPS loss can be made up by the new DPS).

-snip-

So yeah, Kill off the OT position already, let those that want more damage bring the 5th DPS they always actually wanted to do since Heavensward.

---

You're forgetting one crucial thing. They not only want the extreme DPS, they want to have tank queues while doing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerlinCross

Depends on the fight. There's a couple older fights that zapped the MT and anyone who was close or required tanks to split damage with each other or party members. Personally I'd rather have more things that take into account "Hey we have 2 meaty targets" than more damage.

Because if Damage is all we really care about; ax the second tank, bring a 5th DPS, ax the double tank mechanics we currently have and give more focus on keeping the only Tank alive(Oh look maybe healers have something to do and the DPS loss can be made up by the new DPS).

Also I'll take being on the bottom of the bell curve if it meant I felt like I was doing something more than just being Blue DPS. You top raiders(riiiiiiiiight) all complained about the stance and they went "Fine, they hate it so much, removed" and we got nothing to replace it with. "Damage output standpoint" yeah as for more tanking output rather than crying about FFLogs all the time.

I don't even know what tanks want to do anymore besides out DPS MNK and BLM these days it seems. Yes, damage is the only thing that matters after a certain point so why not ask for SOMETHING ELSE? Oh wait no you'll master it and go right back to needing more damage.

So yeah, Kill off the OT position already, let those that want more damage bring the 5th DPS they always actually wanted to do since Heavensward. Besides, how many upper half of the bell curve raiders actually try to salvage it if the MT goes down? Just speeds everything up. Do it Square.

---

We already have single tanks in alliance raids, whats your point?
And who say tanks want to outdps DPS jobs?

And YES damage is what we all care about, we literally are buying three times more expensive materia to buy 2-3% damage advantage, and barely anyone is investing in tenacity.

The difference in DPS contribution for tanks in both expansion is big enough to notice it, basically tanks are doing 15-18% less than they used to. The difference is even bigger if we shew off tanks who used tank stance instead of offensive stance. Warrior in 4.5 was doing massive damage in offensive stance in dungeons to the point where dps were not needed much, its all now gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

And who say tanks want to outdps DPS jobs?

-snip-

The difference in DPS contribution for tanks in both expansion is big enough to notice it, basically tanks are doing 15-18% less than they used to. The difference is even bigger if we shew off tanks who used tank stance instead of offensive stance. Warrior in 4.5 was doing massive damage in offensive stance in dungeons to the point where dps were not needed much, its all now gone.

---

To answer your first question: Apparently, you are saying that.

Have you actually looked at AOE potencies?

Healers and tanks are very close what DPS can do. Some of the potencies are even exactly the same; the difference being that DPS jobs may get some oGCDs or special procs that can put them a little above what tanks and healers can do.

If you want to talk dungeons in particular - In the 90th percentile, tanks are doing very well right now.

https://i.imgur.com/m0neYP1.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

To answer your first question: Apparently, you are saying that.

Have you actually looked at AOE potencies?

Healers and tanks are very close what DPS can do. Some of the potencies are even exactly the same; the difference being that DPS jobs may get some oGCDs or special procs that can put them a little above what tanks and healers can do.

In fact, tanks do out DPS a good chunk of DPS jobs in dungeons. In the 90th percentile, tanks do very well, even beating out some DPS jobs.

---

Unless I am reading this chart wrong, it looks like tanks only out damage each other, SCH, and AST. GNB and WHM seem to be fighting for the top spot between Tanks and Healers. Maybe you or someone could provide me the correct instructions on how to interpret the chart.

https://i.imgur.com/O0qH5dw.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

To answer your first question: Apparently, you are saying that.

Have you actually looked at AOE potencies?

Healers and tanks are very close what DPS can do. Some of the potencies are even exactly the same; the difference being that DPS jobs may get some oGCDs or special procs that can put them a little above what tanks and healers can do.

If you want to talk dungeons in particular - In the 90th percentile, tanks are doing very well right now.

https://i.imgur.com/m0neYP1.png

---

Noooobody cares about dungeons. Nobody cares about AoE. We have been talking about raiding, why are you trying to change the conversation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarretOblivion

Noooobody cares about dungeons. Nobody cares about AoE. We have been talking about raiding, why are you trying to change the conversation?

---

I care. How else would I get those good glam items?

Mind clarifying what dungeon needs the same level of gameplay as a raid situation to warrant a massive tank change just in regards of aoe damage (as an example)? Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

To answer your first question: Apparently, you are saying that.

Have you actually looked at AOE potencies?

Healers and tanks are very close what DPS can do. Some of the potencies are even exactly the same; the difference being that DPS jobs may get some oGCDs or special procs that can put them a little above what tanks and healers can do.

If you want to talk dungeons in particular - In the 90th percentile, tanks are doing very well right now.

https://i.imgur.com/m0neYP1.png

---

I was speaking mainly about WAR, because it is the job who got hit the most by the changes.
Now compare WAR DPS from stormblood and SHB, it is +/- 10 percent points lower now which makes it 15% dps nerf overall, he is second last in dps performance at the top level of play in dungeons, where in Stormblood he was next to DPS numbers above healers and other tanks.
And furthermore if we talk about the average speed, warrior dropped from 96 percentile to 80 percentile which makes it 18% speed nerf to his overall performance in dungeons, this number is HUGE.

Scaling is what they changed and they made it so war is now the weakest tank job even weaker than healers and i could feel through my own skin because i played warrior back then and right now and the difference in performance its just too big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarretOblivion

Noooobody cares about dungeons. Nobody cares about AoE. We have been talking about raiding, why are you trying to change the conversation?

---

Because the nerf is visible in dungeons and it easier to tell that warrior got nerf hammered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

If you want to talk dungeons in particular - In the 90th percentile, tanks are doing very well right now.

https://i.imgur.com/m0neYP1.png

---

While this would obviously not work in a raid setting since why play DPS if tanks did equal damage. I still want to take a moment and bask at how evenly split virtually every job is on that chart. It's just so nice and comfy compared to looking at the laughable "balance" the DPS roles have in a single target environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xtrasweettea

Unless I am reading this chart wrong, it looks like tanks only out damage each other, SCH, and AST. GNB and WHM seem to be fighting for the top spot between Tanks and Healers. Maybe you or someone could provide me the correct instructions on how to interpret the chart.

https://i.imgur.com/O0qH5dw.png

---

Thanks for posting this. I'm much more into groups and dungeons than I am raiding.

For dungeons the tank DPS nerfs (relative to where they've often been over the years) matter even more than raiding. Especially using party finder - a huge number of DPS players never bother upgrading their gear past lvl 70 and either don't realise or don't care how much they are gimping the group and being carried.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mitsubashi

Thanks for posting this. I'm much more into groups and dungeons than I am raiding.

For dungeons the tank DPS nerfs (relative to where they've often been over the years) matter even more than raiding. Especially using party finder - a huge number of DPS players never bother upgrading their gear past lvl 70 and either don't realise or don't care how much they are gimping the group and being carried.

---

Tome gear will take you to 80 without issue.

It's that bad huh? Ironic that they gave wars an aoe combo while nerfing their dls. Overpower to mythril tempest spamming also is clunky as heck. Id rather go back to spamming just overpower. Or not having an aoe combo for that matter if they could retune dps to compensate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NyneSwordz

It's that bad huh? Ironic that they gave wars an aoe combo while nerfing their dls. Overpower to mythril tempest spamming also is clunky as heck. Id rather go back to spamming just overpower. Or not having an aoe combo for that matter if they could retune dps to compensate.

---

But, but, we need more buttons to press!! (Yes, even if they ultimately do nothing but devalue, and thereby make less frequently viable, choices that would have offered more fine and fluid control over our rotations, because who's got time to think for more than a half-second?)

Damage of tanks now will be even lower compared to DPS, just look at those all dps buffs lol.

I think I as a PLD I should of been doing this kind of damage at lvl 70 endgame. Still sad when lvl 50-60 A rank mobs can still hit me with debuffs even though I outclass them by miles. Mob accuracy-DH needs to be reduced to 0% for mobs 20-30 lvls lower than a player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

Damage of tanks now will be even lower compared to DPS, just look at those all dps buffs lol.

---

The DPS are responsible for the majority of the DPS. Who'd have thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

Damage of tanks now will be even lower compared to DPS, just look at those all dps buffs lol.

---

The changes are minute and the consequence of what is being changed (Damage-dealer's dps) is mostly irrelevant outside of particular thresholds. If this is where you'd have to draw the line, you've got nothing to draw it with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deceptus

The DPS are responsible for the majority of the DPS. Who'd have thought.

---

DPS have always been responsible for the majority of DPS. So I'm not sure what your point is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NyneSwordz

DPS have always been responsible for the majority of DPS. So I'm not sure what your point is?

---

wooooosh
/10char

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhyAmIHere

wooooosh
/10char

---

Doesn't that describe your situation as well?

The point was that "It's always been that way (despite allowing for slightly higher relative tank dps in the past, so why make a point of it now?)"

1. Relative tank dps seems to have declined. (Complaint with little additional information or warrant.)
2. The DPS are responsible for the majority of the DPS, so this is precedented. (Slight oversimplification)
3. DPS being responsible for the majority of the DPS didn't previously prevent tanks from having higher relative dps than they do now. (Query for the connecting point between the generalization and the case at hand.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Doesn't that describe your situation as well?

The point was that "It's always been that way (despite allowing for slightly higher relative tank dps in the past, so why make a point of it now?)"

1. Relative tank dps seems to have declined. (Complaint with little additional information or warrant.)
2. The DPS are responsible for the majority of the DPS, so this is precedented. (Slight oversimplification)
3. DPS being responsible for the majority of the DPS didn't previously prevent tanks from having higher relative dps than they do now. (Query for the connecting point between the generalization and the case at hand.)

---

Yup that and also we get into a situation in PFs where even more pressure is on any DPS not to die. If one dies more blame is put on them now than ever. In SB/HW where tank damage was a about 12-13% each of contribution to the boss you could make the arguement of "we can help/recover". The pressure on DPS has increase, and it feels like the pressure on Tanks got moved to DPS and I would even argue Healers more since their damage scaling on bosses is much higher than SB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarretOblivion

The pressure on DPS has increase, and it feels like the pressure on Tanks got moved to DPS and I would even argue Healers more since their damage scaling on bosses is much higher than SB.

---

The main assumption on why so few players play tanks and healers is because those two roles bear too much pressure. So, it's not really a bad thing to even that a little more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

The main assumption on why so few players play tanks and healers is because those two roles bear too much pressure. So, it's not really a bad thing to even that a little more.

---

Generally agreed. Though, while I'd prefer that DPS have a larger set of responsibilities (apart from just not dying) in, say, 4-man content, I've never really felt like dps have any less effort required of them in most 8-mans content, given the increased difficulty of their rotational performance; it might not be much more than tanks', but I feel like it at least compensates for swapping in/out and popping defensives, which is about all that remains of tank-unique mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

I've never really felt like dps have any less effort required of them in most 8-mans content

---

That's the tricky part since "pressure" and "effort" are not really the same. For me, tanks have been the easiest jobs to play "decently" pretty much since the beginning of ARR.
But "you have to push your DPS even if it cost you tanking capabilites" has been an extremely important aspect of tanking, and only put even more pressure on those that considered trying.

Now, you still have to push your DPS, but 1) it doesn't cost you anything and 2) it has less impact, so if it takes a little time to adjust to mechanic before doing very good DPS, it will be hard to blame you for enrage. And, if you went the DPS route because you felt that you wouldn't be as accountable, now you'll be.

My feeling is that tank damage is fine but healer damage is to high, they're doing about the same in the case of whitemage or slightly less damage than tanks where I would prefer if they accounted for a lower percent of the total raid DPS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

That's the tricky part since "pressure" and "effort" are not really the same. For me, tanks have been the easiest jobs to play "decently" pretty much since the beginning of ARR.
But "you have to push your DPS even if it cost you tanking capabilites" has been an extremely important aspect of tanking, and only put even more pressure on those that considered trying.

---

My point is, though, that the pressure of tanking amounts to someone screaming at you to breathe steadily and keep your pace. It's being screamed, so it of course feels oppressive... until you realize what little is being asked of you. The disparity, in either direction, is probably the largest reason we have as few tanks as we do. The pressure is high until it's perceived nearer to effort (slightly lacking, in some cases, at least compared to its obvious further opportunities for interaction), but that initial period is enough to scare off many more casual players just as the end is enough to lose the attention of players wanting a more intense experience.

Tanks contribution dropped by another 1 percent point after massive DPS buffs.

Here ya go, the dps overbuffing season has begin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BarretOblivion

Noooobody cares about dungeons. Nobody cares about AoE. We have been talking about raiding, why are you trying to change the conversation?

---

I wasn't. Someone else brought up dungeons and aoes. Check the previous posts. So on the contrary: apparently there are tank mains that care about aoe, and care about dungeon performance.

Otherwise they wouldn't be complaining that their aoe damage is low, yeah?
-
But back to the topic of raiding, I still haven't seen a good explanation of why tank DPS should be higher than the DPS of healers that want to DPS.

If SE does buff the DPS of non-DPS roles, it should be for all of them, not half of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

But back to the topic of raiding, I still haven't seen a good explanation of why tank DPS should be higher than the DPS of healers that want to DPS.

If SE does buff the DPS of non-DPS roles, it should be for all of them, not half of them.

---

There's no argument that supports a tank increase that cannot also support a healer increase, that's why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

But back to the topic of raiding, I still haven't seen a good explanation of why tank DPS should be higher than the DPS of healers that want to DPS.

If SE does buff the DPS of non-DPS roles, it should be for all of them, not half of them.

---

Because there is one big difference between pressing 3 buttons all the time and 10-13 buttons.
Also it is harder to be melee than ranged you cant just stick to the target in melee range for the entire raid and forget about aoes, even tanks cannot do that, casters have it easier, they dont have to line up their rotation with the mechanic like healers who just spam same spells without second thought.
And still healers are able to dish out more damage than tanks for some reason if they 100% on pure dps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

Because there is one big difference between pressing 3 buttons all the time and 10-13 buttons.
Also it is harder to be melee than ranged you cant just stick to the target in melee range for the entire raid and forget about aoes, even tanks cannot do that, casters have it easier, they dont have to line up their rotation with the mechanic like healers who just spam same spells without second thought.
And still healers are able to dish out more damage than tanks for some reason if they 100% on pure dps.

---

It's more complex to maximize damage GCDs as a healer than as a tank.

Healers have no real way to deal with movement.

Healers by default rarely get to be "100% pure dps".

Healers bring far too much utility to be matching and even exceeding tanks in damage contribution, who do practically nothing BUT deal damage. It's extremely unsatisfying to manage an actual dps rotation only to have a healer deal more damage than you.

https://www.fflogs.com/zone/statisti...=Any&bracket=2

Dark Knight is literally rock bottom in raid dps, which is ridiculous. There is a reason other games don't have tanks dealing less damage than healers. It's not at all balanced and this will hurt the game longterm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J-Reyno

Healers bring far too much utility to be matching and even exceeding tanks in damage contribution, who do practically nothing BUT deal damage. It's extremely unsatisfying to manage an actual dps rotation only to have a healer deal more damage than you.

https://www.fflogs.com/zone/statisti...=Any&bracket=2

Dark Knight is literally rock bottom in raid dps, which is ridiculous. There is a reason other games don't have tanks dealing less damage than healers. It's not at all balanced and this will hurt the game longterm.

---

This ^^^ plus remember, healers DPS 'rotations' are even worse than Tank rotations. Sorry, but I should not see a healer be down my neck when I am having nearly 100% uptime on a boss as a Tank.